This is going around, but being framed improperly by the dishonest press. The money for being in the Super Bowl is a bonus, so the tax is related to his yearly salary and duty days in California and why he pays more than the bonus. But it’s still pretty interesting how greedy California is in taking money from athletes like this who compete in the state. You have to negotiate a good contract because probably close to half of your income goes to the government. But that’s the government, they see your money as belonging to them until they can take it. Hence why they seize bank accounts and investment accounts if they’re inactive for a certain period of time… And we didn’t even have income taxes until 1913 in this country other than during the civil war, repealed after, and a brief time around World War I which was ruled unconstitutional, also with the income tax of 1913 they could use tax exempt status to coerce churches and religious organizations… Income taxes today by the federal government, states… are diabolical and excessive. You’re actually a government slave for a nice chunk of the year if you think about it.
By Alex Brasky
Have you ever had a job where it felt like you were paying to work?
Well, Seattle Seahawks quarterback Sam Darnold experienced just that during the week of Super Bowl LX.
According to former NFL QB Boomer Esiason, who now hosts a morning talk show on WFAN Sports Radio, Boomer and Gio, Darnold lost money playing in this year’s big game.
As a result of California’s jock tax, a local income tax that impacts visiting professional athletes, Darnold had to pay the state of California nearly a quarter of a million dollars to perform under the bright lights in Santa Clara.
“For winning the Super Bowl, the winning team, each player gets $178,000—in other words, the Super Bowl isn’t a part of their salary,” said Esiason on Monday’s show. “And they look at duty days. So each spends seven days in the state of California. So those are seven duty days, and they pierce your regular salary at 3.5%. So he has to pay—when you take into account he got the $178,000 plus his overall salary, he has to pay the state of California for spending seven days there $249,000.”
Sam Darnold lost money on Sunday?? Boomer says the NFLPA should shut down any future Super Bowls in California: pic.twitter.com/3Rki5K6HT4— WFAN Sports Radio (@WFAN660) February 9, 2026
So, if you do the math, Darnold paid $71,000 to play in Super Bowl LX. Now, that’s one heck of a day at the office.
Esiason then argued that the NFL Players Association should refuse to allow its players to play the Super Bowl in California moving forward.
“If I’m the NFLPA, I’m like, ‘Hey, we’re not playing any more Super Bowls in California,” he said. “We’re just not doing it.”
It’s tough to argue his point, as it’s hard to justify what is supposed to be a player’s crowning achievement turning into an expense. The NFL should fix this immediately.